Is Epistemic Safety Threatened by Frankfurt Cases? A Reply to Kelp Cover Image

Is Epistemic Safety Threatened by Frankfurt Cases? A Reply to Kelp
Is Epistemic Safety Threatened by Frankfurt Cases? A Reply to Kelp

Author(s): Dominique Faria
Subject(s): History of Philosophy, Philosophical Traditions
Published by: Instytut Filozofii Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego
Keywords: knowledge; epistemic safety condition; Gettier; Frankfurt-type cases; Christoph Kelp

Summary/Abstract: I intend to argue that the counterexamples inspired by the Frankfurt-type cases against the necessity of an epistemic safety condition for knowledge are not plausible. The epistemic safety condition for knowledge is a modal condition recently supported by Sosa (2007) and Pritchard (2015), among others, and can be formulated as follows: (SC) If S knows that p on basis B, then S’s true belief that p could not have easily been false on basis B. I will try to argue that the safety condition, expressed in (SC), is still necessary for knowledge and that, therefore, epistemic safety is not threatened by Frankfurt-type cases. In particular, I want to show that Kelp’s counterexamples are ineffective against (SC).

  • Issue Year: 17/2020
  • Issue No: 66
  • Page Range: 66-71
  • Page Count: 6
  • Language: English